Un marked Camera vans

[alcam]

Actually no, you haven’t covered all of that.

No, my last sentence is absolutely 100% correct.

If the figures reduce with the introduction of the 20mph limit, there will still be recorded numbers of KSI.

Will you accept those numbers, or will you campaign for further reductions? If you accept the reduced numbers, what makes your level of KSI more acceptable than mine.

I strongly believe that you will accept the level of KSI that a 20mph limit brings. Which means that you are weighing benefits against inconvenience and decided that the new level of KSI is okay for the inconvenience you suffer. Just like everyone else.

I have covered every point you've made .
Your last sentence presumes to know what I'm thinking . Wouldn't you accept I know that better than you ?

 

[r4dent]

That’s very poor. They normally allow 10% + 2mph, just to avoid unnecessary prosecution of those that make simple and innocent mistakes and are no real danger. To be done for 64 in a 60 is really unlucky and doesn’t really contribute to road safety.

The 10% is an urban myth.
The 2mph is an allowance for the max error permitted on the speed detection equipment.
e.g if you are travelling at exactly 70 mph the camera/gun is certifiable if it indicates between 68 & 72.

For more details it is worth reading the ACPO document. https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enforcement-Guidance.pdf

 

[Rolyan57]

The 10% is an urban myth.
The 2mph is an allowance for the max error permitted on the speed detection equipment.
e.g if you are travelling at exactly 70 mph the camera/gun is certifiable if it indicates between 68 & 72.

For more details it is worth reading the ACPO document. https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enforcement-Guidance.pdf

Actually, it’s not an urban myth; where people make the mistake is that they think it’s an entitlement. It’s not.

The police CAN prosecute for any amount over the speed limit. However, most forces allow a leeway of 10% + 2mph, simply to avoid prosecution of the everyday simple errors.

Both the above are facts and easily verifiable. Section 9.6 very clearly shows the limit at which ‘education’ is not an option is 10% + 2mph.

 

[Rolyan57]

I have covered every point you've made .
Your last sentence presumes to know what I'm thinking . Wouldn't you accept I know that better than you ?

No, you haven’t covered them. You clearly think there’s a trend when there isn’t. You’ve given no evidence of any statistical rate of change, or root cause etc.

That aside, you can explain what you think by answering the question I politely asked. When the limits are at 20mph and there are still KSI, what will you do? Will you campaign for further reductions (15mph, then 10mph) to try to achieve zero KSI. Or will you accept that the reduced number of KSI is now acceptable, and that no further inconvenience through reduced limits is required.

I strongly suspect it’s the latter, but only you can say, and hopefully you will. At what level of reduction in KSI will you be happy with the reduced limits.

 

[trevexess]

Be aware .View attachment 141816

Time to get some spare plates made up, WM24EHR, use the clips that I had when using a towcar and just put these plates on........ Then speed as fast as you can pastvthese vans...

 

[r4dent]

They normally allow 10% + 2mph, just to avoid unnecessary prosecution of those that make simple and innocent mistakes and are no real danger. To be done for 64 in a 60 is really unlucky and doesn’t really contribute to road safety.

The 10% is an urban myth.

Actually, it’s not an urban myth; where people make the mistake is that they think it’s an entitlement. It’s not.
The police CAN prosecute for any amount over the speed limit. However, most forces allow a leeway of 10% + 2mph, simply to avoid prosecution of the everyday simple errors.

Both the above are facts and easily verifiable. Section 9.6 very clearly shows the limit at which ‘education’ is not an option is 10% + 2mph.

So if ‘education’ is not an option over 10% + 2mph and most forces allow a leeway of 10% + 2mph, simply to avoid prosecution
who gets to go on a course?

We must agree to differ, and as usual semantics and ambiguity play a significant role.

Before I was involved from the inside I always though that 10% + 2 meant no action will be taken.

My understanding now is that
Under +2mph - no action will be taken.
Up to 10% +2mph - the action will be decided by the force and will include no further action / course / court.
Over 10% + 2mph - the action will be decided by the force and will include no further action / court.

 

[Rolyan57]

So if ‘education’ is not an option over 10% + 2mph and most forces allow a leeway of 10% + 2mph, simply to avoid prosecution
who gets to go on a course?

We must agree to differ, and as usual semantics and ambiguity play a significant role.

Before I was involved from the inside I always though that 10% + 2 meant no action will be taken.

My understanding now is that
Under +2mph - no action will be taken.
Up to 10% +2mph - the action will be decided by the force and will include no further action / course / court.
Over 10% + 2mph - the action will be decided by the force and will include no further action / court.

The guidance given in table 9.6 is really clear, and also confirms that it does not restrict officer discretion.

Generally, the guideline is that you get to go in a course when you are between 10% + 2mph, and 10% + 9mph.

The figures for a summons are also given.

These are not our opinions that we can agree or disagree on. These are the official printed guidelines in the Speed Enforcement Policy, section 9, with the data given in the table in section 9.6.